SHIVAN LEEKHA,GURGAON V. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1) GURGAON, GURGAON

ITA 6107/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shivan Leekha against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was dismissed ex-parte. The appellant contended that the physical copy of the order was not served, and due to the closure of business and financial constraints, the appeal was delayed. The Department's Representative opposed the appeal, citing the appellant's chronic default in appearing before lower authorities. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, emphasized the need to look at the delay in a liberal way when supported by justifiable reasons, thus condoning the delay and restoring the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841017 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act of the Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: NITIN GULATI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 6107/Del/2025 Shivan Leekha Vs. DCIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6107/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19) Shivan Leekha Plot No. 296, Phase-VI, Sector-37, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana, 122001, Gurgaon PAN: ABVPL1066D Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Gurgaon Haryana Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv Revenue by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement 27/02/2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 01/01/2024for the Assessment Year 20181-19. 2. There is a delay of nearly 19 months in filing the present Appeal, the Assessee contended that the physical copy of the order has not been served on the Assessee and the business of the Assessee has been closed, therefore, the e-mail id of the Assessee defunct. Further contended that due to financial constraints and the business loss, the Assessee had a dispute with previous tax practitioner, thus Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 6107/Del/2025 Shivan Leekha Vs. DCIT the Appeal could not be filed on time and the delay in filing the present Appeal was not intentional but for the bona-fide reason, thus sought for condoning the delay. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee contended that the physical copy of the order has not been served on the Assessee and the business of the Assessee has been closed, therefore, the e-mail id of the Assessee defunct. Further contended that due to financial constraints and the business loss, the Assessee had a dispute with previous tax practitioner, thus the Appeal could not be filed on time. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 6107/Del/2025 Shivan Leekha Vs. DCIT we condone the delay in filing the present Appeal subject to the Assessee depositing a sum of Rs. 2000/- to Prime Minister National Relief Fund. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 11/03/2021 under Section 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 01/01/2024 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 01/01/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte and the Assessee could not make full compliance before the A.O., which let to making the addition. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal. 8. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order impugned Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 6107/Del/2025 Shivan Leekha Vs. DCIT ex-parte. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. Further, as the Assessee has not made full compliance before the A.O. in order to defend the addition,in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail. 10. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th February , 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 27.02.2026 Reshma Naheed, Sr.P.S Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "